Baby Jane Doe in the media

A review of national television, magazine, and newspaper coverage of the case of Baby Jane Doe indicates that most of it lacked perspective and context; stories were generally incomplete and often imprecise; reporting was sometimes inaccurate; and overall, inadequate attention was paid to the medical, legal, philosophical, and social implications of the case. Human-interest and political elements of the story were generally well covered. Even after taking account of the pressures and constraints of daily and weekly news reporting, we conclude that the print press and television could have done a better job without devoting more space or time to the story. This could have been done by assigning reporters with greater expertise and by paying more attention to the needs of a hypothetical "reasonable reader."     

The antiabortion movement and Baby Jane Doe

In the early 1980s, the leadership of the antiabortion movement became involved in a campaign to establish legal rights to extraordinary medical care for seriously handicapped newborns. Armed with political contacts in the Reagan administration and Congress, and allied with advocates for the disabled, the antiabortion movement searched for a test case to guide through the courts. Antiabortion advocate Lawrence Washburn found such a case in Baby Jane Doe, who was being treated at Stony Brook Medical Center. The movement went on to amend the Child Abuse Act to include protections for handicapped newborns. Activists in the movement chose the issue of Baby Jane Doe because they believed it would attract welcome publicity, give them the appearance of supporting civil rights, and enhance their argument as to the legal rights of the fetus and thus strengthen the case against abortion. The movement was partially successful in obtaining its goals.     

Introduction to the Baby Jane Doe papers

A conference was held at the State University of New York at Stony Brook in October 1984 to discuss the controversy concerning treatment of a newborn with severe congenital defects that became known as the Baby Jane Doe case. Fox provides some background information on the case to introduce a set of of six articles consisting of papers delivered at the conference. These articles deal with historical aspects of the treatment debate (Stanley J. Reiser), problems of clinical decision making (John M. Freeman), the legal issues involved (John A. Robertson), coverage of the case by the media (Stephen Klaidman and Tom L. Beauchamp), federal efforts to regulate the treatment of handicapped newborns (Lawrence D. Brown), and the alliance that arose between opponents of abortion and advocates of the rights of the handicapped (Constance Paige and Elisa B. Karnofsky).     

Baby Doe, Congress and the states: challenging the federal treatment standard for impaired infants

In its amendments to the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act, Congress set forth a strict standard for treatment of impaired infants. The statute, shaped by right-to-life groups and certain medical organizations, calls for aggressive treatment in virtually all cases, regardless of the degree of suffering imposed and the burdens and risks involved. The federal rule evidences deep distrust of parental decisionmaking, relegating most parents to a nonparticipatory bystander role. Congress did not make its rule binding on the states. Rather, it conditioned the receipt of federal funds upon incorporation of the rule into each state's law. Most states have accepted the condition, largely through rulemaking by state child abuse agencies. This article challenges the authority of state administrators to promulgate these rules, and argues that state constitutions, little mentioned in the Baby Doe debate thus far, may prohibit many states from adopting the federal standard. Ordering medical interventions that perpetuate extreme conditions of physical and mental devastation, subjecting infants to grave suffering for uncertain benefits, and depriving parents of virtually all decisionmaking power violates the norm of governments constitutionally committed to individual liberty, human dignity and family autonomy. A constitutionally sound approach to this issue would permit careful, ethical deliberation, attention to the individual circumstances of each infant Doe and a reasonable degree of parental control.